Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery

, Volume 136, Issue 2, pp 249–255 | Cite as

MRI-associated classification to evaluate the outcome after autologous reconstruction of the medial patellofemoral ligament: a preliminary study

  • R. Best
  • S. Hingelbaum
  • J. Huth
  • F. Mauch
Arthroscopy and Sports Medicine



Purpose of this study was to establish and validate an MRI-associated classification to graduate postoperative results of MPFL reconstructions.


30 autologous MPFL reconstructions of 28 patients were evaluated by two independent raters using MRI. All grafts were assigned to a novel graduation system respecting the graft’s anchoring insertions, its MRI signal appearance, continuity and tension and the differentiation relating to the surrounding soft tissue.


All grafts could reliably be assigned to one of the subgroups by both raters. 86.6 % of the grafts could be classified A1 or B1, reflecting a correct positioning and a low to intermediate signal intensity. Only one graft had to be classified C3 (malpositioned, elongated).


We were able to establish and validate an MRI-associated classification to graduate the postoperative outcome after MPFL reconstructions. Foresighted, the presented classification might support further decision making in case of unsatisfying postoperative results.


MPFL reconstructions MRI classification Postoperative outcome Signal appearance Tunnel positioning 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest





  1. 1.
    Fisher B, Nyland J, Brand E, Curtin B (2010) Medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction for recurrent patellar dislocation: a systematic review including rehabilitation and return-to-sports efficacy. Arthroscopy 26(10):1384–1394CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Menetrey J, Putman S, Gard S (2014) Return to sport after patellar dislocation or following surgery for patellofemoral instability. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 22(10):2320–2326PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Nikku R, Nuetosvaara Y, Aalto K, Kallio PE (2005) Operative treatment of primary patellar dislocation does not improve medium-term outcome: a 7-year follow-up report and risk analysis of 127 randomized patients. Acta Orthop 76(5):699–704CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Balcarek P, Oberthür S, Hopfensitz S, Frosch S, Walde TA, Wachowski MM, Schüttrumpf JP, Stürmer KM (2014) Which patellae are likely to redislocate? Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 22(10):2308–2314CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dejour D, Arendt E, Zaffagnini S (2014) Rediscovering the patellofemoral joint. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 22:2261–2263CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sillanpää PJ, Salonen E, Pihlajamäki H, Mäenpää HM (2014) Medial patellofemoral ligament avulsion injury at the patella: classification and clinical outcome. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 22(10):2414–2418CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Smith TO, Donell S, Song F, Hing CB (2015) Surgical versus non-surgical interventions for treating patellar dislocation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2:CD0081Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Enderlein D, Nielsen T, Christiansen SE, Faunø P, Lind M (2014) Clinical outcome after reconstruction of the medial patellofemoral ligament in patients with recurrent patella instability. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 22(10):2458–2464CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nelitz M, Williams RS, Lippacher S, Reichel H, Dornacher D (2014) Analysis of failure and clinical outcome after unsuccessful medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction in young patients. Int Orthop 38(11):2265–2272CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Elias JJ, Cosgarea AJ (2006) Technical errors during medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction could overload medial patellofemoral cartilage: a computational analysis. Am J Sports Med 34(9):1478–1485CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dejour H, Walch G, Nove-Josserand L, Guier C (1994) Factors of patellar instability: an anatomic and radiographic study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2:19–26CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Schöttle PB, Romero J, Schmeling A, Weiler A (2008) Technical note: anatomical reconstruction of the medial patellofemoral ligament using a free gracilis autograft. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 128(5):479–484CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mauch F, Steinbrück K (2002) Appearance of the patellar tendon graft and correlation with arthroscopy in sportsmen after ACL-reconstruction in lowfield MRI. Dtsch Z Sportmedizin 53(2):49–53Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Endele D, Jung C, Becker U, Bauer G, Mauch F (2009) Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with and without computer navigation: a clinical and magnetic resonance imaging evaluation 2 years after surgery. Arthroscopy 25(10):1067–1074CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Howell SM, Clark JA, Farley TE (1992) Serial magnetic resonance study assessing the effects of impingement on the MR image of patellar tendon graft. Arthroscopy 8:350–358CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mariani PP, Margheritini F, Camillieri G, Bellelli A (2002) Serial magnetic resonance imaging evaluation of the patellar tendon after posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Arthroscopy 18(1):38–45CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fujimoto E, Sasashige Y, Masuda Y, Tsuchida Y, Hisatome T, Kashiwagi K, Sasaki H, Touten Y, Kazusa H, Eguchi A, Nagata Y (2014) Serial magnetic resonance imaging study of posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction or augmentation using hamstring tendons. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 100(7):755–760CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Smirk C, Morris H (2003) The anatomy and reconstruction of the medial patellofemoral ligament. Knee 10(3):221–227CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Torabi M, Wo S, Vyas D, Costello J (2015) MRI evaluation and complications of medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction. Clin Imaging 39(1):116–127CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wagner D, Pfalzer F, Hingelbaum S, Huth J, Mauch F, Bauer G (2013) The influence of risk factors on clinical outcomes following anatomical medial patellofemoral ligament (MPFL) reconstruction using the gracilis tendon. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 21(2):318–324CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Jansson KA, Karjalainen PT, Harilainen A, Sandelin J, Soila K, Tallroth K, Aronen HJ (2001) MRI of anterior cruciate ligament repair with patellar and hamstring tendon autografts. Skeletal Radiol 30(1):8–14CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ma Y, Murawski CD, Rahnemai-Azar AA, Maldjian C, Lynch AD, Fu FH (2015) Graft maturity of the reconstructed anterior cruciate ligament 6 months postoperatively: a magnetic resonance imaging evaluation of quadriceps tendon with bone block and hamstring tendon autografts. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 23(3):661–668CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hollister MC (2000) Dedicated extremity MR imaging of the knee: how low can you go? Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 8(2):225–241PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Orthopaedic Sports MedicineUniversity of TuebingenTuebingenGermany
  2. 2.Department of OrthopaedicsDiakonie Klinikum Schwäbisch HallSchwäbisch HallGermany
  3. 3.Department of OrthopaedicsSportklinik Stuttgart GmbHStuttgartGermany

Personalised recommendations